Shri Ashokkumar Jethalal Patel, Morbi V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5 (3), Morbi

ITA 56/RJT/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8872 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 18-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND SONTAKKE
• Assessee Lawyers: DM RINDANI
• Keywords: Third party statement

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT , , BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA , A CCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVI R PRASAD , JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 56/RJT/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008 - 09 ) SHRI ASHOKKUMAR JETHALAL PATEL, ASHIRWAD, NEW ADARSH SOCIETY, SANALA ROAD, MORBI. / VS. THE INCOME - TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3), MORBI. ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : ABIPP 4944 R ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI D. M. RINDANI, A.R. / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ARVIND SONTAKKE, D.R. / DATE OF HEARING 13 /03/2018 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16 / 0 3 /201 8 / O R D E R PER MAHAVIR PRASAD JUDICIAL M EMBER : THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE REVENUE AGAINST THE APPELLATE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) - 3 , RAJKOT [CIT(A) IN SHORT] VIDE APPEAL NO. CIT(A) - 3 / A3/0409/10 - 11 DATED 08 /0 1/ 201 6 ARISING IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER S.1 4 3(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT') DATED 01/12 /201 0 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2008 - 09 . ITA NO. 56/RJT/2016 SHRI ASHOKKUMAR JETHALAL PATEL VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2008 - 09 - 2 - 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READ AS UNDER: - 1. THE LD. CIT(A) - 3 , RAJKOT HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 96,000 / - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY WAY OF HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) - 3 , RAJKOT ERRED IN CONFIRMING ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.13,92,053/ - BY TREATING AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS INCO ME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) - 3, RAJKOT ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN WHOLLY DISBELIEVING THE CLAIM AND EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF AGRICULTURAL EXPENSES OF RS.2,18,000/ - BY TREATING IT AS BOGUS AND NON - BELIEVABLE . 3. BRIEFLY STATED , FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS INDIVIDUAL DECLARED TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,38,100/ - AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND NET AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.13,92,053/ - . 4. AS AGAINST CASH WITHDR A WAL OF RS. 48,000/ - FOR HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ESTIMATED THE SAME AT RS.1,44,000/ - AND HAS THEREFORE MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.96,000/ - . 5. THE APPELLANT DECLARED IN AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.13,92,053/ - AFTER CLAIMING AGRICULTURAL EXPENSES OF RS.2,18,000/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED TH E VOUCHERS FOR EXPENSES AND HELD THAT THE APPELLANT CANNOT BE SAID TO HAVE INCURRED ANY AGRICULTURAL EXPENSES. AS A RESULT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO HELD THAT WHEN NO EXPENSES ARE INCURRED, THE EARNINGS FROM AGRICULTURE COULD NOT HAVE TAKEN PLACE AT ALL. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO HELD THAT THE CROPS SOLD BY THE APPELLANT MIGHT HAVE BEEN PURCHASED FROM OUTSIDE SOURCES AND SOLD. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TREATED THE ENTIRE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 6. THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN AGRICULTURAL EXPENSES INCURRED DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS OF RS.2,18,000/ - , WHICH IS ONLY ITA NO. 56/RJT/2016 SHRI ASHOKKUMAR JETHALAL PATEL VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2008 - 09 - 3 - 15.66% OF THE GROSS CROPS SALES AND SAME WAS NOT ALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 7. THEREAFTER, APPELLANT FILED FIRST STATUTORY APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) BUT TO NO AVAIL AND LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THIS APPEAL. 8. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RELEVANT RECORD AND IMPUGNED ORDER. SO FAR FIRST GROUND IS CONCERNED WITH REGARD TO CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS.96,000/ - . SAME IS NOT PRESSED BY THE LD . AR BECAUSE OF SMALLNESS OF AMOUNT AND SAME IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 9. SO FAR SECOND GROUND WITH REGARD TO ADDITION OF RS.13,92,053/ - IS CONCERNED. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION, LD. AR FILED DETAILED PAPER BOOK CONTAINING DETAILS OF LAND HOLDING IN THE NAME OF THE APPELLANT. ALSO FURNISHED SALE BILLS IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM A ND FILED DETAILED CHART SHOWING HOLDING OF LAND AND YIELD OF COTTON HAS BEEN FILED EARLIER, WHICH SHOWS AVERAGE YIELD OF 5540 KGS PER HECTARE OF LAND. THE SALE VOUCHERS CONTAIN ING THE DETAILS SUCH AS WEIGHT, RATE AND VEHICLE N UMB ER. THE CONTRA CONFIRMATION ACCOUNT FROM BOOKS OF THE PURCHASER WA S ALSO FILED. STATEMENT OF THE APPELLANT WAS ALSO RECORDED U/S.131 OF THE ACT BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER. HE CATEGORICALLY STATED BEFORE THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2007 - 08, HIS TOTAL AGRICULTURA L INCOME WAS OF RS.13,92,053/ - . 10. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION, THAT APPELLANT HAS FILED SUFFICIENT PROOF IN SUPPORT OF HIS AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND IN SUCH CASE, PLEA TAKEN BY THE APPELLANT SHOULD NOT BE DISBELIEVED. THEREFORE, WE ALLOW THIS GROUND OF APPEAL. 11. SO FAR AS THIRD GROUND RELATED TO AGRICULTURAL EXPENSES OF RS.2,18,000/ - IS CONCERNED . I N RESPECT OF EXPENSES, APPELLANT FILED VOUCHER OF EXPENSES. AS PER THE IMPUGNED ORDER, SAME IS ONLY 15.66% OF THE TOTAL GROSS RECEIPTS BUT AFTER THE DET AILED ARGUMENTS, ITA NO. 56/RJT/2016 SHRI ASHOKKUMAR JETHALAL PATEL VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2008 - 09 - 4 - LD. AR REQUESTED THAT IF EXPENSES MAY BE INCREASED TO THE TUNE OF 2 5% INSTEAD OF 15 % THAT WILL BE ACCEPTABLE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF THE JUSTICE, WE INCREASE EXPENSES FROM 15% TO 25% AND ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF MAKING CALCULATION. THEREFORE, THIS GROUND IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 12. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT IS PARTLY ALLOWED. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 16 / 0 3 /201 8 SD/ - SD/ - ( ) ( ) ( PRADIP KUMAR K EDIA ) ( MAHAVIR PRASAD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 16 /03 /2018 PRITI YADAV , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 3 , RAJKOT. 5. , , /DR,ITAT, RAJKOT 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, RAJKOT 1. DATE OF D ICTATION 13 /03/2018 (DICTATION - PAD 3 PAGES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 14 /03/2018 3. OTHER MEMBER... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P.S./P.S .. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P.S./P.S . 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER .. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER